I wrote the following proc, which simulates the filter function in Lodash (javascript library) (https://lodash.com/docs/4.17.4#filter). You can call it in 3.5 basic formats, seen in the examples section. For the latter three calling options I would like to get rid of the the requirement to send in -s (shorthand). In order to do that I need to differentiate between an anonymous proc and a list/dict/string.
I tried looking at string is, but there isn't a string is proc. In researching here: http://wiki.tcl.tk/10166 I found they recommend info complete, however in most cases the parameters would pass that test regardless of the type of parameter.
Does anyone know of a way to reliable test this? I know I could leave it or change the proc definition, but I'm trying to stay as true as possible to Lodash.
Examples:
set users [list \
[dict create user barney age 36 active true] \
[dict create user fred age 40 active false] \
]
1. set result [_filter [list 1 2 3 4] {x {return true}}]
2. set result [_filter $users -s [dict create age 36 active true]]
3. set result [_filter $users -s [list age 36]]
4. set result [_filter $users -s "active"]
Proc Code:
proc _filter {collection predicate args} {
# They want to use shorthand syntax
if {$predicate=="-s"} {
# They passed a list/dict
if {[_dictIs {*}$args]} {
set predicate {x {
upvar args args
set truthy 1
dict for {k v} {*}$args {
if {[dict get $x $k]!=$v} {
set truthy false
break
}
}
return $truthy
}}
# They passed just an individual string
} else {
set predicate {x {
upvar args args;
if {[dict get $x $args]} {
return true;
}
return false;
}}
}
}
# Start the result list and the index (which may not be used)
set result {}
set i -1
# For each item in collection apply the iteratee.
# Dynamically pass the correct parameters.
set paramLen [llength [lindex $predicate 0]]
foreach item $collection {
set param [list $item]
if {$paramLen>=2} {lappend param [incr i];}
if {$paramLen>=3} {lappend param $collection;}
if {[apply $predicate {*}$param]} {
lappend result $item
}
}
return $result
}
Is x {return true} a string, a list, a dictionary or a lambda term (the correct name for an anonymous proc)?
The truth is that it may be all of them; it would be correct to say it was a value that was a member of any of the mentioned types. You need to describe your intent more precisely and explicitly rather than hiding it inside some sort of type magic. That greater precision may be achieved by using an option like -s or by different main command names, but it is still necessary either way. You cannot correctly and safely do what you seek to do.
In a little more depth…
All Tcl values are valid as strings.
Lists have a defined syntax and are properly subtypes of strings. (They're implemented differently internally, but you are supposed to ignore such details.)
Dictionaries have a syntax that is equivalent to lists with even numbers of elements where the elements at the even indices are all unique from each other.
Lambda terms are lists with two or three elements (the third element is the name of the context namespace, and defaults to the global namespace if it is absent). The first element of the list needs to be a valid list as well.
A two-element list matches the requirements for all the above. In Tcl's actual type logic, it is simultaneously all of the above. A particular instantiation of the value might have a particular implementation representation under the covers, but that is a transient thing that does not reflect the true type of the value.
Tcl's type system is different to that of many other languages.
Related
I have a piece of code like this
oo::class create class_test {
variable title_text
variable result
method title {t} {
set title_text $t
set result [format "%-6s %-6s" {*}$title_text]
}
method print {} {
return $result
}
}
set a "abcde"
set b "fghij"
class_test create foo
foo title {"$a" "$b"}
puts [foo print]
The real output is
$a $b
While the expected output is
abcde efghi
Could someone help to fix it?
Change
foo title {"$a" "$b"}
to
foo title [list $a $b]
so that the variables get substituted by their values.
You want to expand substitutions inside a {brace-quoted} string (logically) after the point that it is written in the script. This isn't usually recommended (not when you can construct arguments with list correctly), but you can do it.
method title {t} {
set title_text [lmap value $t {
uplevel 1 [list subst $value]
}]
set result [format "%-6s %-6s" {*}$title_text]
}
We do the transform on each word in the argument (lmap) and the transform is to apply subst to it, which must be done in the caller's context (uplevel 1). The use of list in there is so that we guarantee that we make a substitution-free script to run in the outer context, a very strongly recommended practice.
A feature of TclOO is that you don't need to take special precautions to use uplevel (or upvar) when using it, unlike some other older object systems for Tcl. That makes doing this sort of thing in a method no more tricky than doing it in a normal procedure. This is true even when inheritance is present.
Could someone help to fix it?
I fail to see why you, first, pack variable references into a single value and, then, uplevel-substitute them. In addition, the number of value arguments to format seem fixed. Why not just use two separate formal parameters to your title method and use them directly?
method title {v1 v2} {
set result [format "%-6s %-6s" $v1 $v2]
}
Then just call it like so:
foo title $a $b
Update
to generate the title in different length
then better use args like so?
method title {args} {
set result [format [join [lrepeat [llength $args] "%-6s"] " "] {*}$args]
}
args is the natural way of having a method (proc) with variable arguments in Tcl.
In Python, Ruby 2.0, Perl 6, and some hardware description languages, one can use named arguments. See this example. This makes the code more readable, easy to maintain, etc. Is there a way of getting it done/extension, in TCL 8.6, other than using a dictionary as a workaround?
In 8.6, use a dictionary parsed from args. The dict merge command can help:
proc example args {
if {[llength $args] % 2} {
return -code error "wrong # args: should be \"example ?-abc abc? ?-def def?\""
}
set defaults {
-abc 123
-def 456
}
set args [dict merge $defaults $args]
set abc [dict get $args -abc]
set def [dict get $args -def]
puts "abc=$abc, def=$def"
}
example; # abc=123, def=456
example -abc 789; # abc=789, def=456
example -def 789; # abc=123, def=789
example -def 246 -abc 135; # abc=135, def=246
You can go further than that with verifying (the tcl::prefix command can help) but it's a lot more work and doesn't buy you a lot more in production code. Not that that has stopped people from trying.
There are two proposals to add full named argument handling
(TIP #457, TIP #479) to 8.7 at the moment, but I'm not sure that either have really gained traction. (The problem from my perspective is the extra runtime cost that has to be borne by code that doesn't volunteer to support named arguments. There might be other issues too, such as disagreement over preferred syntax; I've not paid so much attention to that as I'm still fretting over the performance implications in a pretty hot piece of code.)
There is an entire page on the tcler's wiki that discusses named arguments: http://wiki.tcl.tk/10702
You can do it yourself with a little creativity. There are several mechanisms that allow you to do this:
procs can define other procs
proc behave just like a proc (the function definition system is not a syntax, it is a function call)
procs can use the args argument instead of positional parameter and manually process the list of arguments
you can execute code in any parent stack frame using uplevel
you can pull variables from any parent stack frame using upvar
everything is a string!
etc.
I'm not sure I've listed all the possible mechanisms.
My personal implementation of this idea is optproc: http://wiki.tcl.tk/20066
The implementation itself is quite simple:
proc optproc {name args script} {
proc $name args [
string map [list ARGS $args SCRIPT $script] {
foreach var {ARGS} {
set [lindex $var 0] [lindex $var 1]
}
foreach {var val} $args {
set [string trim $var -] $val
}
SCRIPT
}
]
}
I basically used string manipulation (string map) to directly insert the function body ($script) into the defined function without any substitutions etc. This is to avoid any $ or [] from being processed. There are many ways to do this but my go-to tool is string map.
This is similar to Donald's answer except for two things:
I don't transform args into a dict instead I manually process args and declare each local variable in a loop.
This is a meta solution. Instead of processing args I created another function (syntax) to create a function that processes args.
Usage (stolen from Donald's answer) would be:
optproc example {abc def} {
puts "abc=$abc, def=$def"
}
But note that my solution is not the only solution. There are many ways to do this limited only by creativity.
In ns2, I declared a simple array using
array set ktree {}
then I tried to use it as a GOD variable as
create-god $ktree
but this gives the error
can't read "ktree": variable is array
while executing
"create-god $ktree {}"
Any help is greatly appreciated.
In Tcl, $varName means “read from the variable called varName” and is not a general reference to the variable (unlike some other languages, notably Perl and PHP, which do rather different things). Reading from a whole array, instead of an element of that array, is always an error in Tcl.
To pass an array to a command, you pass the name of that array in. It's then up to that command to access it as it sees fit. For procedures and methods written in Tcl, it'll typically involve upvar to link the array into a local view. (Things written directly in C or C++ have far fewer restrictions as they don't automatically push a Tcl stack frame.)
Note however that the command must be expecting the name of an array when you pass that name in. (Good programmers will document this fact, of course.) Whether create-god does, I really have no idea; it's not a general Tcl command but rather something that's more specific. (Part of ns2? Or maybe your own code.)
Example of passing in an array
An example of passing in an array by name is the parray command that should be part of every Tcl distribution. It's a procedure that prints an array out. Here's the source code without a few boiler-plate comments:
proc parray {a {pattern *}} {
upvar 1 $a array
if {![array exists array]} {
error "\"$a\" isn't an array"
}
set maxl 0
set names [lsort [array names array $pattern]]
foreach name $names {
if {[string length $name] > $maxl} {
set maxl [string length $name]
}
}
set maxl [expr {$maxl + [string length $a] + 2}]
foreach name $names {
set nameString [format %s(%s) $a $name]
puts stdout [format "%-*s = %s" $maxl $nameString $array($name)]
}
}
The key thing here is that we first see upvar 1 to bind the named variable in the caller to a local variable, and a test with array exists to see if the user really passed in an array (so as to give a good error message rather than a rubbishy one). Everything else then is just the implementation of how to actually pretty-print an associative array (finding out the max key length and doing some formatted output); it's just plain Tcl code.
What is the syntax for a proc in tcl which automatically takes arguments if user din't give any arg?
I used something like
proc a {{args 1}} {
puts $args
}
a
when I used this I dint get my args value as 1. It returns a blank string. Please help me with this.
It sounds like you're trying to do two different things together:
Accept a variable number of arguments to your proc
If no arguments are provided, use default value(s)
There isn't really a syntax for proc that handles this case specifically. However, it's fairly easy to accomplish. You can accept a variable number of arguments (args keyword), and then check to see if any were supplied (and use a default value if not).
proc myproc {args} {
if { [llength [info level 0]] < 2 } { #called with no args
set args {the default list of values}
}
# rest of the code goes here
}
The info level 0 command returns the actual command being run as it was called, with arguments. Hence, if the length of it's result is < 2, we know the current command was called with no arguments (since the first element in the list is the actual command name itself).
The word args is a reserved word that has a specific meaning in proc definitions. Use a different variable name:
proc a {{x 1}} {
puts $x
}
a
Additional answer
In a proc definition, default values are given by defining the argument as a list with two members: the first will be the name of the argument, the second is the default value.
The word args is a special argument that implements rest arguments (that is, it captures remaining arguments not specified in the argument list). This is how one can implement variadic functions in Tcl.
The args arguments and default values can be used together when defining procs. But args cannot have default values. Any argument listed before args can have default values. But arguments that have default values must be listed after arguments without default values. So, basically you can write a function like this:
proc a {x {y 1} args} {
puts "$x $y ($args)"
}
a 1 ;# prints 1 1 ()
a 1 2 ;# prints 1 2 ()
a 1 2 3 4 ;# prints 1 2 (3 4)
If your use-case meets this pattern then you can define arguments with default values before args like the example above. If not, then your only option is to process args yourself:
# Assume parameters are key-value pairs,
# if value not given then default to 1
proc b args {
foreach {x y} $args {
if {$y == ""} { set y 1 }
puts "$x -> $y"
}
}
b 1 2 ;# prints 1 -> 2
b 1 2 3 ;# prints 1 -> 2, 3 -> 1
I have a question about passing parameters in Tcl regarding to the following code:
set name "Ronaldo"
proc GET_PLAYER_INFO {player_id {player_name "$name"}} {
global name
puts $player_name
}
regarding to the code above, we have a global variable "name", and in the parameter list of proc GET_PLAYER_INFO, the default value of parameter player_name is set to "$name"? if the value of name is "ronaldo", it is already double quotation，do we need to put double quotation in the parameters list like this: player_name "$name"? and before we execute the "global name" command, is the default value of player_name is "Ronaldo"? is so, why we need to have "global name" command in our proc?
That won't work as it stands; the $name won't be evaluated at all so the default will be those literal five characters.
If you're binding the default value at the time you create the procedure, you'd do it like this:
proc GET_PLAYER_INFO [list player_id [list player_name $name]] {
...
}
That is, the arguments to proc are just normal things you can construct with Tcl commands and substitutions. This is one of the great things about Tcl.
However, if you're wanting to evaluate that $name at the time the procedure is called, you've got to do it differently. If you've got some kind of value that will never be used for the player name (e.g., the empty string) then it's pretty easy:
proc GET_PLAYER_INFO {player_id {player_name ""}} {
if {$player_name eq ""} {
set player_name $::name
}
...
}
Note that I've used the fully-qualified variable name there. There are other ways to get that name too (e.g., with global, with upvar, with variable, …)
The place where things get tricky is when you've not got a suitable sentinel value at all. At that point, you have to see how many arguments were actually supplied:
proc GET_PLAYER_INFO {player_id {player_name ""}} {
if {[llength [info level 0]] == 2} {
set player_name $::name
}
...
}
The command info level 0 returns the full list of argument words to the current procedure call. This includes the GET_PLAYER_INFO itself and would be a list of length 2 or 3 in a valid call to the definition above. Once the list is available, checking its length is a trivial exercise in llength and numeric comparison. (Using a sentinel value is easier though, and works in 99.99% of cases.)
The final option is to use the special args formal parameter and do the parsing manually:
proc GET_PLAYER_INFO args {
if {[llength $args] < 1 || [llength $args] > 2} {
return -code error "wrong # args: should be \"GET_PLAYER_INFO player_id ?player_name?\""
}
set player_id [lindex $args 0]
if {[llength $args] > 1} {
set player_name [lindex $args 1]
} else {
set player_name $::name
}
...
}
As you can see, this is rather long-winded...